Page 659 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 20 May 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
A report in the leading British medical journal the Lancet of 22 December 1990 said:
On the 28th August, 1990 Dr William L. Marcus, chief toxicologist for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's drinking water programme, claimed that the original findings of the NTP -
the national toxicology program which conducted the study -
study showed the cancer hazard from fluoridated drinking water to be greater than the NTP was telling the public.
He went on to say:
The reviewers were not given all the data ...
If I were to be allowed the time to list the number of scientists who repeatedly showed that there was a cover-up there, I would be happy to do so; but it is all contained within my dissenting report in the report of our Standing Committee on Social Policy inquiry into water fluoridation in the ACT. So, it has been acknowledged in a number of court cases that Burk and Yiamouyiannis did allow for age, race and sex. We have this acknowledged by proponents of fluoridation.
What do we have in Australia? It is a fascinating situation. We have heard again and again that the National Health and Medical Research Council, the ADA and the AMA support fluoridation as being safe and say that there is no evidence to the contrary. Let us look at what they said about the Burk and Yiamouyiannis study. The AMA said that Yiamouyiannis had failed to take proper account of existing differences in age, race and sex. Was that true? No, it was not true. The Australian Dental Association said that the general criticism was that Burk and Yiamouyiannis dealt basically in crude cancer statistics and did not take into account many factors relating to cancer mortality, such as age, race and sex. Was that true? No, that was not true, either. The National Health and Medical Research Council said:
By far the most important of the criticisms of Yiamouyiannis and Burk ... is of the inadequacies of the procedures ... and [they] did not allow at all for race and sex.
Was that true? No, that was not true, either. Burk and Yiamouyiannis showed that there was an increase in cancer deaths in fluoridated areas as against unfluoridated areas in America, since fluoridation, of between 10,000 and 20,000 people. In other studies that you may not have heard about, they showed that the general increase in death rates, not specifically from cancer, was between 30,000 and 50,000 in America.
What has happened as a result of this and the cover-up in America by some of the authorities? In September 1991, 40 dentists took the American Dental Association to court for suppressing the data that fluoride causes an increase in the incidence of cancer, and this has been proven in a number of court cases in America. We should look at this; it is very dangerous not to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .